Jihad is Here in America

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by longknife, Sep 16, 2014.

  1. Regular Joe

    Regular Joe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,758
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Your response to me is noted. Why can't you simply participate in an intelligent discussion?
     
  2. J0NAH

    J0NAH Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    8,047
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    0
    if you dont like multicultural societies then go move to iceland, or latvia, or finland. It gets bitterly cold there.
     
  3. Foolardi

    Foolardi Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2009
    Messages:
    47,987
    Likes Received:
    6,805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    When you can prove this isn't 100% true :
    Not ALL Muslims are terrorist but ALL Terrorists Are Muslim.
     
  4. MrConservative

    MrConservative Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,681
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The OP mentions a mere handful of Muslim terror attacks over several years. Compare that to the number of people murdered in the City of Chicago every month.
     
  5. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh, so that's the qualifier you chose to use to write off 9/11, because you would have to do that or your entire argument would fall flat instantly. I guess it's an important distinction between Muslims who were born here versus those who you would gladly let into the country to live here?

    And let's see those numbers. I noticed you didn't produce any. I'd wager that there are more incidents of hated white guys with guns, yet when compared to their overall percentage in society, they represent a disproportionately low threat. Muslims would most likely be disproportionately high. You'd ignore that part, of course, because it harms your anti-white, pro-brown people narrative, to which you subscribe to and base your progressive ideology on.


    And yet we don't have tens/hundreds of millions of "bible literalists" acting on any of those Old Testament scriptures, do we? Ever wonder why that is? It's because the Old Testament was perceived as an older covenant between God and man, based on the law of Moses, which was superseded by the covenant established by Jesus. And the violence in the OT was rarely, if ever, open ended commands that would be valid for all time, unlike with the Qur'an. It was directed at certain tribes, at certain times, at certain places.

    But of course, these details are meaningless to people who support non-white, non-Western things by default, and believe they can do no wrong.

    You said there was no central authority in Islam, yet there are schools of jurisprudence that rule on positions that extend throughout the religious area of Muslims. In other words, you were wrong.

    So your opinion is that 15% is a "small subset" of Muslims? You Islamoapologist leftists like to talk about how tiny the minority is of extremists within the religion, yet 15% seems like a pretty big chunk of them. If 15% of Christians in the world were behaving like Muslims, somehow I don't think you'd be applying your PC filter to the issue.
     
  6. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe you are confusing a partisan nonsensical statement and intelligent discussion.

    Of course I could have misinterpreted you statement and it was an attempt at satirical humor in which case, I mistakenly did not attribute an appropriate level of sophistication to either you or it, for which I apologize.
     
  7. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do you have such trouble in understanding a simple english statement?

    I originally stated:
    Seems to me that these home-grown jihadists aren't nearly as dangerous as vanilla white nutbars with automatic weapons going on shooting sprees.

    the OP is about jihadis in America is it not?

    What part of: "At least its not even close in body count." did you fail to understand?



    Thank you for making my arguments for me.

    to paraphrase:

    And the violence in the Qu'ran was rarely, if ever, open ended commands that would be valid for all time. It was directed at certain tribes, at certain times, at certain places.

    And secondly, I am certainly not a bible scholar but didn't Jesus say:

    “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (NIV, Matthew 5:17–18 )

    Gee even christian scriptures contain contradictions and various interpretations.


    yet another logical fallacy. You surely do like them, don't you?



    There are schools of jurisprudence that extend to those who follow such and do not apply to those that do not.
    There is NO central authority like the pope or Archbishop of canterbury.

    Any supposedly learned muslim may issue a fatwah, but not all muslims would regard it as law.

    Keep trying tho, one day if we keep this up long enough you might gain a truer understanding of the breadth and depth of Islam and be able to discern the vast differences that can be found within that religion. Why its almost like being a christian or jew - broad labels that do not in anyway reflect both the nuanced and blatant differences that can co-exist under them.



    Okay, so 15% is not small in comparison to 85% in your world.

    I am not an Islamoapologist. I am fully cognizant of the barbaric doctrinal aspects of these Islamist fanatics.
    However, unlike Islamophobes such as yourself, I do not paint all muslims with the same brush.

    You might also be rather amazed that muslims come in all shapes, sizes and colors, much like your fellow christians.
     
  8. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The 9/11 hijackers were in America, were they not? You had to insert the "home-grown" part because you knew that 9/11 would destroy your argument. I'm still waiting to hear why it's significant if they were born here vs being allowed to come here on student/work visas.

    So what's your point? That white guys have killed more people in the US than a minority group who comprises ~1-2% of the population? Seems like a pretty stupid thing to have to point out when you consider the demographics of the country. But then, as an Islamoapologist, you'll take whatever you can to defend that problematic group.

    That wasn't my argument. The Qur'an contains many open-ended commands to wage warfare against unbelievers. Many are found in Sura 9, which by the concept of abrogation, remains the most relevant Sura to Muslims today.

    Jesus' last words were "it is finished" (aka "everything is accomplished). As in, the covenant between God and man.

    Pointing out progressive logic looks fallacious because it's so ridiculous, but I am correctly analyzing your intent for defending Islam.

    The only differences that exist come from the fact that there are varying degrees of adherence in every religion. Whether a certain percentage of Muslims wish to disregard large swaths of the Qur'an in order to adapt to Western society has no bearing whatsoever on what the Qur'an actually teaches, which is under no real disagreement globally. The Qur'an is pretty clear in that the punishment for apostasy is death, for example.

    When leftists talk about a small minority, they speak as if extremist Muslims comprise sub-1% of the population, when in all actuality the number is quite a bit higher than that. It's worth pointing out.

    Right, you just enjoy spending your time defending Islam and Muslims.

    I'm not a Christian.
     
  9. Regular Joe

    Regular Joe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,758
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What manner of diversion are you attempting here? Attributing your ignorance to me can't work. Find out what an "automatic" weapon is. Find out the political registration/affiliation of EVERY SINGLE mass shooter in recent history. When you are prepared to participate in intelligent discourse, get back to me.
     
  10. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    you got it bad.

    It was part of my ORIGINAL STATEMENT. Of course I inserted "home grown" into that statement to make MY POINT which apparently flew completely over your head.


    Amazing. I say by BODY COUNT and it doesn't seem to penetrate.



    No, it does not contain many "open ended" commands any moreso than the bible. Apparently context and continuity of subject is ignored in such "informative" sites as "answering Islam".

    And I don't think abrogation means what you think it means and it sure as hell ain't a "concept".


    how convenient. so all the laws and morality in the old testament are to be abrogated because Jesus said "it is finished"?
    You realize that this is a subject of an enormous amount of debate and interpretation within christianity.
    Seems there are many christians that do not believe that all the OT laws were no longer in force when Jesus died.


    Apparently you are actually unaware of your frequent use of logical fallacies.

    From your responses so far and given your demonstrated poor comprehension it isn't surprising you think you know what so obviously you don't.

    Sectarianism is all about adherence? Thats a good one. I'm sure protestants and catholics and lutherans and calvanists would absolutely agree.


    Whether a certain percentage of Christians wish to disregard large swaths of the Bible, has no bearing whatsoever on what the Bible actually teaches, which is under substantial disagreement of interpretation globally.

    When leftists talk about a small minority? You mean you interpret it as sub1% because I for one have NEVER seen any credible argument that used that %.

    I do agree that it is worth pointing out that 1 % is lower than 15% which is lower than 85%. At least to those mathematically challenged or ignorant of the issue.


    No, but I do attempt to correct the ignorance, misinformation and biased interpretations of Islamophobes such as yourself.


    Seems they dodged a bullet.
     
  11. Wake_Up

    Wake_Up New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    5,290
    Likes Received:
    43
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I suppose you have a source of info on these numbers?

    Can you name the last time any shooting spree was conducted with an automatic weapon?
     
  12. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh look, the guy who says he's not an Islamoapologist is still here, Islamoapologizing :)

    The thread topic is about jihadists in America. The OP makes no distinction between "home grown" ones that were born here, or ones who are simply residing in the country. What possessed you to make that distinction? Was it just a random occurrence?

    Why are you dodging my question? Why would anyone compare body counts when you have a group that has historically comprised 65-85% of the population and one who is only ~0-2%? It's a pointless objection that you raise. Next on your list of amazing feats will be revealing that most of the people who attend Christian churches are Christians.

    “Verses of violence are taken out of context.”

    The Muslim Game:

    All verses of violence were issued during times of war, according to the apologists. They accuse critics who use Qur’anic verses to discredit Islam of engaging in “cherry-picking” (pulling verses out of context to support a position, and ignoring others that may mitigate it).

    The Muslims who rely on this argument often leave the impression that the Qur’an is full of verses of peace, tolerance and universal brotherhood, with only a small handful that say otherwise. Their gullible audience may also assume that the context of each violent verse is surrounded by obvious constraints in the surrounding text which bind it to a particular place and time (as is the case with violent Old Testament passages).

    The Truth:

    Unfortunately, the truth is just the opposite. This is why new Muslims and non-Muslims alike, who begin studying the Qur’an and Hadith, are often confronted with an array of disclaimers and warnings by well-meaning Muslims who caution that it takes “years of study” to fully understand the meaning of certain passages. Neophytes are encouraged to seek the "counseling" of a Muslim scholar or cleric to "help them" interpret what they read.

    It isn't the verses of violence that are rare; it is the ones of peace and tolerance (which were narrated earlier in Muhammad's life and superseded by later ones). Neither is the “historical context” of these verses of violence all that obvious from the surrounding text in most cases. There is nothing overall that limits the targeting of unbelievers to a specific place and time.

    One would think that a perfect book from a perfect god would be easy to understand, but in the Qur’an, constructs and topics often come from out of nowhere and merge randomly in a jumbled mess that bears no consistent or coherent stream of thought. Few Quran's are printed without extensive commentary which often exceeds the size of the original "revelation."

    This is a problem when it comes to many of the verse that dictate violence. Although they can often be mitigated with non-intuitive references to entirely separate passages, not all believers are as determined to force the word of Allah into a separate moral framework. It is unclear why a perfect book from a perfect god would so often leave the brutally sensitive topic of killing open to human interpretation.

    With external references to the Hadith and early biographies of Muhammad’s life, it is usually possible to determine when a Qur’anic verse was narrated and what it may have meant to the Muslims at the time. This is what apologists opportunistically refer to as “historical context.” They contend that such verses are merely a part of history and not intended as present-day orders.

    But “historical context” cuts both ways. If any verse is a product of history, then they all are. Indeed, there is not a verse in the Qur’an that was not given at a particular time to address a particular situation in Muhammad’s life, whether he wanted to conquer the tribe next door and needed a “revelation” from Allah spurring his people to war, or if he needed the same type of “revelation” to satisfy a lust for more women (free of complaint from his other wives).

    Here is the irony of the “cherry-picking” argument: Those who use “historical context” against their detractors nearly always engage in cherry-picking of their own by choosing which verses they apply “historical context” to and which they prefer to hold above such tactics of mitigation.

    This game of context is, in fact, one of the most popular and disingenuous in which Muslims are likely to engage. Simply put, the apologists appeal to context only when they want it to be there - such as in the case of the bellicose 9th Sura of the Qur'an, which calls for the subjugation and death of unbelievers. They ignore context when it proves inconvenient. An example of the latter would be the many times in which verse 2:256 is isolated and offered up as proof of religious tolerance (in contradiction to Muhammad's later imposition of the jizya and the sword).

    Islamic purists do not engage in such games. Not only do they know that the verses of Jihad are more numerous and authoritative (abrogating the earlier ones), they also hold the entire Qur’an to be the eternal and literal word of Allah… and this is what often makes them so dangerous.

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Games-Muslims-Play.htm#context

    Sure it is. Whenever two verses in the Qur'an contradict each other, the one revealed later in Muhammad's prophetic career is said to supersede the earlier one. Most of Islam's more peaceful verses have been abrogated by more violent ones.

    Then why don't we see Christians enacting the laws of the Old Testament?

    There have been no fallacies at all. You're just spinning your wheels.

    And it helps that the Bible is much less violent than the Qur'an.

    Yes, that is my interpretation. Are you really trying to say that when leftists speak of a "tiny minority of extremists", they were actually referring to nearly 1 out of every 6 Muslims in the world being extremists?

    In other words, you're an Islamoapologist.

    There's nothing irrational about the fear of Islam. If they didn't vote Democrat, you might actually have the balls to call them out on their treatment of gays, women, religious minorities, etc. Actually, you wouldn't, because leftists only confront those groups who don't fight back, like Christians. Left-wing politics is not something any leftist would risk losing their head over.

    How so?

    - - - Updated - - -

    I asked him for the numbers several times, and he has yet to produce. Weird, huh?
     
  13. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, when anyone makes unsubstantiated claims that arise from some whacko source, like this idiotic accusation from a Tea Party Candidate and insist that this is the truth without a single shred of evidence, I generally do not ascribe those statements as being intelligent.

    When you have done your homework, perhaps you'll get back to me and we can both laugh at the absurdity of the claim and the idiocy of the accuser.




     
  14. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oh dear. Mea culpa, with a semi-automatic weapon.

    As for numbers, how many home grown all american jihadi attacks have their been in the last 15 years?

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2

    and here's a list of mass shootings in the US from Jan1/14 to Aug 17/14.

    http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map?page=2

    Compare those lists to this list of ALL muslim related attacks on American soil (wrongly identifying some as terrorist attacks), althought this list does not necessarily identify the muslims in question as americans, it does identify foreign attackers where possible. That obviously includes the 9/11 scumbags who were all foreigners.

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/americanattacks.htm
     
  15. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What possessed me to make the distinction is the paranoia that America has over muslim terrorists, when apart from 9/11 (perpetrated by foreign AQ members) both the number of incidents and the number of deaths is substantially lower than American deaths due to mass shootings by all american white boys.

    AS to what difference there is between home grown muslim attacks and those "residing here", there is a huge difference.
    Those foreign muslims are at war with America and coming to America to either recruit fighters or perpetrate attacks. And they haven't been able to do a very good job of it since 9/11.

    Its called attempting to bring a little perspective to bigots and the paranoid.

    I am not dodging any question. I said body count and that was the point. It is not an objection. Again it is a point that you seem unusually incapable of comprehending.

    As to per capita, there are roughly 2.6 million american muslims and 37 muslim terrorist murders since 2001. In that same period there have been 190,000 other murders in America. Seems even the per capita % are less than the body count.


    http://kurzman.unc.edu/muslim-american-terrorism/
    Oh dear, facts can be such annoying things for the paranoid and haters.

    An interesting interpretation.

    Its not a strong case. Yes, the Mecca and Medinah surahs are very different in tone and tenor. The claim of conteporary influences resulting in the difference is well laid out. In Medina he had been exiled from Mecca and was truly peeved. He was fighting against the polytheist pagans for control of the haj. The earlier sura were more prophetic and the later sura were more legalistic, mirroring the evolution of Mo from prophet to leader of the fledgling muslim nation.

    Oh? Seems there is rather a significant internal controversy wrt abrogation in quranic interpretation.
    http://www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/quran/false_accusations/abrogation_claims_(P1216).html


    They do enact some and not others. There is much dispute over the abrogation of earlier OT verses in the christian community.

    For instance, the 10 commandments do not appear in the New Testament, only 5 of the ten are mentioned by Jesus.

    I suggest you do some research on logical fallacies since it is apparent you can't recognize when you are indulging in them.

    I'd venture to say that the OT is as violent as any scripture. The NT isn't very violent, except in revelations and the nonsense about judgement day.


    straw man. I NEVER said a "tiny" minority.
    (btw that is a logical fallacy)


    wow. this idiotic assertion that some how deomcrats and "leftists" are anti christian is typical of the unsubstantiated accusations that the christian right eats up.

    What I find ironically amusing is that many in the GOP (christian right) are both hostile to and ignorant of Muslim and are not afraid to articulate such hostility and ignorance while claiming that the left panders to muslims to obtain votes. Couldn't possibly be anything that the republicans do or say could or would influence muslim political attitudes. Typical.

    No you didn't. You simply went off about %'s in an attempt to counter my original statement about body count. Yet you didn't provide a single source for your allegation.

    Weird, Huh?


    BTW, I did supply sources in a previous post today, that proved my argument correct and your rebuttal wrong.
     
  16. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So in your attempt to whitewash Islam and Muslims and the damage they have caused, you intentionally leave out 9/11, which was the largest attack ever on US soil. Maybe we can try and whitewash the Germans by leaving out the Holocaust? Would you be in favor of that? We can do that for any group's history, just leave out the stuff they did that harms our apologist narrative. How about it, Jonsa?

    And you still haven't given any numbers on "mass shootings by all american white boys." It's weird how you choose to focus exclusively on the crimes that whites are committing. You don't seem interested in exploring the mass killings of Hispanics and Blacks, two groups who are more likely than whites to commit murder. Why is that, Jonsa? Are you a self loathing white, like many leftists, are you Jewish? Help me understand this.

    You're comparing two different things - murders committed in terrorist attacks and regular day-to-day murders (of which non-white minorities commit the majority - something you'd be too afraid to discuss). Considering the left's hesitance to label Islamic terror attacks "terrorism" (Ft. Hood being the most notable example), I'm not too confident in this analysis of yours.

    You don't have a moral high ground. You think you do, but you hate groups as well, you just hate different groups (whites, clearly).

    Counter to your pro-Islamic sites.

    He was a prophet the entire time. He seized power by force, turning that "fledging Muslim nation" into the predominant religious group in the area.

    The article does a good job of explaining how the "out of context" excuse that you employed fails to hold water. That's why you didn't really address that counter in any substantive way. It's where apologists like yourself run out of talking points ammunition.

    There's no significant internal controversy over it. The tortured logic that the author of that piece employs is not accepted by hundreds of millions of Muslims around the globe. The historical understanding of the concept dates back all the way to the 7th century and there was no widespread confusion over it. Only in the post 9/11 era did apologists like the author (and by extension, you), choose to redefine what was established Islamic doctrine.

    Oh really? Why aren't Christians stoning adulterers nowadays, then?

    So what? Jesus didn't comment on every single issue raised in the Old Testament.

    It's fallacious to accuse someone of making logical fallacies when they are not.

    Thanks for sharing your opinion. I disagree with it.

    I didn't say you said it. I said leftists said it, and there are many examples of them saying it.

    [video=youtube;SGCDsSceEVQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGCDsSceEVQ[/video]

    Like most non-white minorities, they are hostile towards whites and the party that is perceived to be the party of whites, and vote accordingly. Not a surprise at all.

    False:

    You did no such thing. Once again you're comparing 2 different things. First you tried to compare regular day-in, day-out murders (that whites commit a disproportionately low percentage of), and now you're trying to compare "mass shootings" with "terrorist attacks", when the two are not the same thing. And, again, you feel that this is an adequate position to have, despite the fact that you are comparing a group who is less than 1% of the population (if your 2.6 million figure is accurate.... there are 330 million people in the US), to the remaining 99%+ of the rest of the population.

    Pretty weak, Jonsa.
     
  17. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is that like when you had your little adventure in Indo-China? I expect that's exactly what they thought of Americans when you invaded Vietnam...
    But of course that was different, wasn't it?
     
  18. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Seems you can't get over some things. Like I made a statement that I have backed up with references and you have merely restated the same argument over and over again.

    Yes I intentionally left out 9/11 because my point was that home grown islamist terrorists haven't done nearly as much damage to Americans as white mass murdering nutbars.
    WHAT IS IT ABOUT THIS POINT THAT YOU DO NOT COMPREHEND?

    And then you go all Godwin on me with yet another logical fallacy. I do wish you'd learn what the hell they are.

    But I did provide you with sources that support my claim. I realize the point about white boys with guns flew over your head. I used "white" as a term to relate the point about paranoia and the fact that you don't seem paranoid about white guys (I assume you are one) with semi auto weapons letting loose.

    What would my being jewish have to do with anything - got an irrational paranoid beef with jews like you have with muslims?



    No, I am comparing the act of mass murder, regardless of reason. If those attacks do not instill terror in the populace, then why would the NRA and its supporters go ape poopy about open carry anywhere and arming teachers to "prevent" such "random" acts of mass murder?

    And there you go with yet another logical fallacy. amazingly consistent if nothing else. You attempt to apply a highly suspect generalization to call into question my fact based perspective.


    yet another logical fallacy. I provide the facts and you come back with ascribing sentiments to me that I have never once expressed.

    Yes. that is how it works, but I use Islamic sites which should have significantly better perspective of their own religion than a christian site trying to counter muslim teaching. Not that you'd actually appreciate the difference.


    Of course he was the prophet the entire time. I guess you can't appreciate his changing contemporary circumstances and how that is reflected in the two general types of surah, nor the intermixing of them throughout the quran.

    He did fight for dominance. That was how it was done in the 7th century. Know anything about christian history in the dark ages?


    Yes, there is significant controversy and in particular the lack of understanding of the types of abrogation and their impact on quaranic interpretation.

    I don't have to counter it since I reject the gross generalizations the author makes without him distinquishing what surah make his case. Let alone accurate contextuality.

    What part they do enact some and not others do you not understand?

    As for so what? If OT laws are all abrogated by the NT, what happened to the other 5 commandments? Seems Jesus rejected them since AFAIK, he established christian law through his supposed sayings and as you pointed out, God's original covenant was supposedly fulfilled upon his death, which meant all those old laws were no longer valid.

    Apparently, you have no clue what a logical fallacy is, so here's a handy cheat sheet:

    [​IMG]


    Are you really trying to say that when leftists speak of a "tiny minority of extremists", they were actually referring to nearly 1 out of every 6 Muslims in the world being extremists?

    you implied it. as your comment above indicates. Again incorrectly restating my position to argue against it. Might wanna look up what kind of logical fallacy that is.



    Seriously? Jerusalem as the capital of Israel? Apparently you have no clue how contentious such a position is. Interesting that both parties have the same plank, but yet for some unknown reason, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS FAILED TO RECOGNIZE JERUSALEM AS THE CAPITAL OF ISRAEL SINCE 1947.

    Of course recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel has nothing to do with christians. It is a political issue.

    AS to adding reference to god in the platform, you think that is anti-christian? What a ridiculous and idiotic attempt to imply something that is clearly not.

    Yet another bigoted unsubstantiated assertion. You seem to be one of those paranoid white people who think everyone that isn't white is out to get them. Funny how history has clearly demonstrated the reverse to be true. You appear to provide a contemporary example of same.


    mea culpa.


    No I compared mass shootings to home grown Islamic terrorist attacks.

    Yes I compare mass shootings to terrorist attacks because essentially they are the same thing.
    Or do you think for example that the Sandy Hook shootings didn't create terror amongst the citizenry across the nation?

    Now about your argument of demographic %.

    There are 2.6 million muslims and according to the source provided 137 deaths since 9/11/01 America. That works out to roughly 1 in 190,000 per year.

    White people represent roughly 224,500,000 of the population.
    In 2011 alone according to the FBI 32.5% of murders were committed by white people. That works out for 2011 to be roughly 1 in 47,250.
    Which one represents a higher frequency?

    Oh NO! you are wrong again.


    Anytime you want to bring actual facts to the table instead of bigoted generalizations and unsubstantiated accusations, I'll be waiting.
     
  19. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm exposing your dishonest argument for what it is. It's easy to arrive a small number when you convenient leave out something as large as 9/11 and narrow the parameters of your scope. If a "homegrown" Islamic terrorist committed a 9/11, you'd limit your argument to "Islamic terror attacks West of the Mississippi", just so you can continue derping along through life talking about how few people they are killing. It's a transparent strategy and I hope the intelligent members of the forum can see through it.

    Of course I don't. Whites commit a disproportionately low amount of violent crime relative to their population size. Your fearmongering over guns doesn't change that.

    Ah, figures. Many Jews are dedicated to sabotaging white Western culture and advancing socialism. This explains why you are sympathetic with Islam. You have the same goals and the same enemies.

    A terrorist attack requires a specific intent and motivation. I realize how discarding this requirement allows you to increase your "death toll" figures to help your argument along, but you're simply comparing 2 different things, when you logically shouldn't be.


    I'll let the honest members of the forum decide your motivation for complaining multiple times about "all American white boys".

    But the millions of Muslims out there who support terrorist groups don't have a better perspective of their own religion? You and your specific website selection hold a better understanding?

    And you have no evidence that the sites I've selected so far are "Christian cites". That's just your Jewish animosity for Christianity showing through in your argument.

    I know Christianity as it was practiced by Jesus was nothing like what Muhammad did, and it was 600-700 years earlier in time.

    For the same book to say "There is no compulsion in religion" to requiring that Jews and Christians "pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued", it is either a direct contradiction (impossible according to Muslims, as the Qur'an is the perfect word of God), or the earlier verse was abrogated by the second. Millions upon millions of Muslims agree with the latter interpretation, as it was virtually unchallenged until the post 9/11 era, when suddenly Muslims and their apologist allies had to pacify Islam's image as to not awaken concern into the areas of the world that they are slowly invading.

    Why aren't they enacting that one? If the Old Testament is still what Christians supposedly follow, why aren't they doing any of the old school barbarism that the OT apparently contains? Why is this only really happening with Islam?

    True, which is why the early Christians by and large no longer followed the Law of Moses the way it was followed before Jesus. That didn't stop "thou shalt not kill" for being a basis in the rule of law, because it's a good policy for a society to have in general, and it was later adopted by Western law.

    This isn't a substitute for a rebuttal. Keep reaching.

    No thanks. I'd rather cut through your semantical BS and get an answer. The small minority of extremists that leftists routinely speak of, do you really think they are referring to 1 out of 6 Muslims in the world being extremists? That's not really a small minority, in my opinion. What do you think?

    The crowd was clearly more upset with God being a part of the platform than they are with Jerusalem being the capital of Israel. You recognized this. To counter, you responded as if Jerusalem was the focus of the video instead of God being a part of the platform.

    Clearly left-wing Democrats opposed the issue. Are you really disputing that left-wing Democrats are more likely to oppose Christianity?

    More anti-white racism. I'm sensing a pattern with you. History has shown that whites are just as likely to be victimized by a non-white majority as the reverse. See Zimbabwe and South Africa for two examples. It's true even in the US. Who is more likely to get victimized, a white walking through Compton at 2:00 AM or a black walking through Beverly Hills?

    They're not the same thing, at least not necessarily. If the intent of the attack was to terrorize the population, then it's a terrorist attack. If a kid was picked on by a group of bullies and came to school one day and mowed them down, his intention was not to terrorize the public, even though he would be categorized as a "mass shooter". So clearly it's not the same thing as you imply.

    Such idiotic logic being employed here in your post. First, the number was 37 the last time you quoted it, not 137. This is only the number of deaths attributed to "Islamic terrorism". Muslims have killed more than 37 people in the last 14 years. The rest of their crimes are lumped in to generalized FBI crime statistics, almost always under the "white" column.

    Feel free to source your FBI crime statistics page. Here is the one I typically use

    If you look at the murder row, there were 8,641 total murders in 2009. 4,261 were committed by "whites", 4,209 were committed by blacks, 91 committed by Indians/Alaskan Natives, and 80 committed by Asians/Pacific Islanders. So, going by this we have 49.31% of murders being committed by "whites". The problem is that the "whites" group is comprised of non-white groups like Hispanics, Arabs, and others. This is done to make the black murder rate seem less disproportionately high. So all of the Mexican mafia/ MS-13, Crips/Bloods, Latin Kings street warfare existing in Democrat controlled cities all across the country are putting more "white" murders in the record books. That's changing this year, and Hispanics are going to be tracked separately now. We will really see how disproportionately low the white murder rate is, and you'll have to find a new anti-white talking point to use.

    My point in all of that is that your statistic is highly flawed. You don't know how many murders actual white people committed in 2011, and you don't know how many murders that Muslims have committed since 9/11. You're simply a white hating Jew, a socialist, and you don't have a clue what you are talking about. I find it funny that you are willing to dedicate so much time to defending Muslims, who have historically been a bigger enemy of Jews than Christians, and still say you are not an Islamoapologist. It's a absolute joke. How you can live with so much cognitive dissonance between your ears is a real mystery.
     
  20. longknife

    longknife New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    6,840
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why is it that every thread like this has to be hijacked by Muslim apologists to try to divert from the OP?

    The original threat dealt with those living here in the USA who are being turned into believers that America is a bad place and needs to be brought to pay for its efforts against terrorists in other places.

    What is so difficult to understand about that?

    Make all the quotes and references that you wish. The bottom line is: There are Islamic teachers who are doing their best to convince youth that their only mission in life is to kill anyone who does not believe in Islam!
     
  21. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once again you totally miss my point. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

    AS to the intelligent members of this community, I would venture to say most of them can see the fact you are oblivious to the original point.



    My "fearmongering"? NONSENSE. You want to deny facts.
    I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of your own fearmongering and hatred towards muslims. A fact amongst many you fail to grasp.


    Yet another example of your bigotry.
    You continue to attempt to pull wholly unsubstantiated accusations of my position and motives out of your arse.
    A logical fallacy.



    Yes specific intent and motivation. You don't think that these mass murderers had a specific intent or motivation? What ridiculous nonsense.



    Hahahahahahahhahahaha!

    Even when it is explained to you, you choose to miss the point. I can't determine if it is deliberate deflection or merely a function of entrenched bigoted opinion that precludes you from listening to any opinions that do not align with yours.



    No they don't have a better perspective since for the most part their interpretations are ignorant or perverse and not supported by the VAST majority of muslims.

    for some inexplicable reason you can't grasp that 15% is a small minority.


    my "jewish animosity"? Nothing like showing your true bigoted colors. For the record, I am not jewish.


    that ain't saying much. I guess you don't have a clue about the history of christianity and how it was was practiced by Jesus because Jesus was a Jew. It wasn't until long after his death that the judeo-christian sect became full fledged christianity. It also appears as tho you do not know how christianity was practiced in the dark/middle ages. this is also not surprising I supppose.


    Apparently you don't understand the meaning of the verse nor that paying jizya is not a compulsion to convert.
    Yes, many muslims like many christians believe that their scripture is the inerrent word of their god. Contradictions, circular logic and mythos notwithstanding.


    Hello, mcfly?

    I ask again, what part of some old testment morals and laws are still practiced and some are not do you not understand?

    As to why Christianity doesn't follow what to modern society are barbaric punishments, perhaps it has something to do with things like the Magna Carta and English Common law, or later the reformation or later still the enlightenment. It took some 1500 years for the reformation in christianity. Islam has only been around for 1400 years. Looks like the time is nearing given the secular violence that is currently occuring.




    "Thou shalt not kill" predates Judiasm and Christianity as legal edict. In fact most of the 10 commandments (notably not the edict on graven images) can be found in earlier societies. Might want to look up the Code of Hammurabi.



    Hahahaha.
    You are hilarious. Got news for ya. when you engage in logical fallacies, no rebutal is necessary because you are presenting a fallacious argument.

    I do wish you'd educate yourself in this regard since it seems that very large % of your responses fall into that category.



    Yes, I think that 15% (which is less than 1 out of 6, which I believe is taught in grade three math) is a small minority. A large minority would be 40% or 49%. I never thought that proportion was difficult concept to comprehend for anyone, but I guess I was wrong.


    Hold it, didn't the motion pass? You are actually using the fact that the motion (no matter how ignorant of middle east politics and no matter how oblivious to other beliefs) PASSED to make your case? Now that is a glaring example of ideological entrenchment.
    remarkable.


    Wow. the fact you ignore history is unbelievable. History has not shown anything of the sort. Perhaps you should read up on the history of european imperialism, european slavery, the opium wars, indigenous people's genocide, etc etc etc. And get back to me when you have a slightly more informed position.

    And using anecdotal evidence in an attempt to justify an argument is yet another logical fallacy. Guess it follows that you won't learn if you refuse to.


    Mass public terror is not a criteria for classifying a terrorist act. Bet that kid's intent was to terrorize jhis school community and gain revenge. "Nobody's gonna bully or laugh at me again" - gee I wonder why?
    Seems you have a very rigid and narrow comprehension of what constitutes a terror attack. In the broadest sense it is ANY attack that as one of its motivations is to spread fear(terror) into a group, community or nation. It can come from a single individual like the unibomber or an organized group like AQ.


    Wow. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. that means that deaths from muslim "terror attacks" are 1 roughly 703,000 per year .

    for some reason you are using arrests as a measure and 2010 stats, when convictions would be more appropriate and here is the 2011 fbi stats I used:

    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3


    So what's the beef? muslims are not a race. neither are arabs. Here is the the story so far. You are paranoid about muslim terrorists. I prove to you that Muslim terror attacks on US soils do not amount to much in comparison to the large number of amerians being killed by home grown white mass murders. PERIOD.

    You can wiggle around claiming that whites have a lower murder rate that blacks and latinos, but that isn't the point I was making. I was not in any way even remotely proposing anything that could be construed (accurately that is) as claiming white boys kill more people than any other race, which is what you have fixated on in your response. Yet another example of your failure to listen and your kneejerk instransigent perspective.

    ONce again you are talking out of your arse. I am not a jew. I am not a socialist. I am white. I do have more than a clue as to what I am talking about.

    I don't apologize for religious fanatics, but when I encounter bigots with all their fear mongering, misrepresentations and outright lies, I attempt to provide them with actual information. I realize with many, including you it seems, it's an effort that yields little result but at least presents a more balanced view than the crap you and yours tend to spew.

    Islamists like all religious fanatics are scum of the earth in my book.

    I have clearly and repeatedly stated my own bigotry.
    I hate the paranoid delusions of white power pinheads masquerading as nationalists, nazis , holocaust deniers, commies, religious fanatics and pedophiles.
     
  22. CJtheModerate

    CJtheModerate New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2013
    Messages:
    5,846
    Likes Received:
    50
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Foremost among them being Muhammad.
     
  23. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree there are some Islamic teachers doing that.
    They don't appear to be very effective at it since it seems their pupils are killing orders of magnitude more muslims than they are infidels.

    Likewise there aren't a whole bunch of these Islamist terrorists who are willing to kill running around the planet.
    Given all the known groups of these clowns, I doubt their ranks add up to anywhere near a million fighters worldwide.

    The other side of the coin is that there are vastly more Islamic teachers that are not teaching such perverted religious mumbo-jumbo of hatred and death.
     
  24. Brewskier

    Brewskier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    Messages:
    48,910
    Likes Received:
    9,641
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You have yet to show that whites with "semi automatic guns" are a big problem in our society. We have a lot of "white guys with guns" in our country, why are attacks not very common? You're just fearmongering.

    Strawman.

    How can their perspective be based on ignorance and yours built on knowledge? You're not a Muslim, they are. You haven't practiced the religion in an Islamic society your whole life, they have. I'm just trying to figure out how a left-wing white Westerner claims to know Islam better than tens/hundreds of millions of actual Muslims? How can they all be wrong? And no, their interpretation is not rejected by the "VAST" majority of Muslims. 80% of Egyptian Muslims believe that apostasy should be punishable by death. In many areas of the world, your progressivized PC version of Islam is in the minority.

    I disagree that it's a small minority, at least in the context of what apologists say when they are trying to argue about how small the minority is in relation to the overall population.

    Then why did you say this? Were you lying?

    Christianity in the dark ages was not like how the religion was practiced early on. The reformation movement brought the religion back towards Jesus' teachings.

    I understand the meaning perfectly. If there is no compulsion in religion, then Muslims wouldn't be able to compel Jews and Christians into either converting, agreeing to live as 2nd class citizens under their rule, or be killed, yet that's exactly the kind of society that Muhammad advocated for. Like I said, it's either a contradiction or the "no compulsion" verse had been abrogated.

    Standard left wing argument. We need to give Islam a few more centuries to get it's act together, since that's how long it took Christianity hundreds of years ago, prior to much of the human advancement that we had during these last 150+ years. Like with blacks, we can't hold them to the same standard as everyone else, can we?

    They passed it even though the majority of their constituents didn't agree. They didn't want to look bad in front of the whole world so they pretended they had the support. If you watched the video, clearly they didn't.

    News flash, there was imperialism, genocide, slavery, and wars for other non-white groups. Every group has blood in their history, yet you only wish to focus on whites and Europeans, due to your anti-white bigotry/ white guilt. It's pathetic.

    If a kid is simply trying to get back at the group who is bullying him and is not trying to send a message to society then it's not a terrorist attack. When those post office workers went to work and shot up their coworkers, they weren't trying to terrorize the country. Your argument that mass killings = terrorist attacks is really a dumb argument to make.

    Why are convictions more appropriate? I'm simply giving the source I've used to show the disparity between white and black crime. Was 2011 radically different from 2009? I doubt it. Blacks have committed around 50% of the nation's homicides annually for a long time.

    And, again, you're comparing 2 completely different things and ignoring the huge differences in population size. Pretending otherwise is not going to work.

    It's very important to show how stupid your obsession over "all American white boys with guns" is. After all, it's what you based your argument on.

    Then you claimed to be a Jew for no reason. Now I doubt your honesty even more. Who knows what the truth is, at this point?

    You're not providing actual information. You're simply whitewashing a problematic group in society and their ideology because they are politically useful to your left-wing agenda.
     
  25. Talon

    Talon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    46,673
    Likes Received:
    26,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    When discussing the root causes of jihadism and takfirism it would be helpful to remember and focus on what you pointed out in bold-type. However, to be precise, the radical teachers are are doing their best to convince youth that their only mission in life is to kill anyone who does not believe in their version or interpretation of Islam. Look at ISIS and Hezbollah - both of them are Islamist groups, but they subscribe to different versions/interpretations of Islam (this where takfirism comes into play - both groups see each other as heretics).

    The source of the jihadist pipeline that funnels recruits to terrorist groups begins at the point of indoctrination. We're never going to get a handle on this problem until everyone gets a handle on who and what is indoctrinating and radicalizing Muslims and turning them into Islamist zealots who are more than willing to impose their ideology on people through the use of force and terror.
     
    longknife and (deleted member) like this.

Share This Page